General Discussion > Web Development and Site Suggestions

[IC Forums] Discussion: Proposed Ruleset

(1/13) > >>

Morwen Lagann:
EDIT/UPDATE 2015/04/05: New (condensed) version of the rules has been posted here.

Again, my apologies for the extreme delay in getting these things out; people have had RL up the wazoo.

This is the first thread of several to come covering aspects of the planned IC forum. This particular thread is intended to cover the rules that we want to have and enforce on the new forum, and mostly duplicates an existing thread in the private moderator areas.

We (okay, I) have taken the original EVE forum rules located here and sorted them into three groups. Each rule has a note with it; these are the quick summaries that I attached to each rule in the original thread. Thoughts from the moderation team (some paraphrased, some quoted) have been added to rules where specific comments were directed.

In the interest of transparency: based on feedback from the moderation team, a number of rules have been moved from their original position in my first iteration of the list, and some of their summaries have been updated since then, too. The first iteration of the list was posted internally on December 17th in response to a post from Mizhara on the 15th.

Since there are a lot of rules listed here, for the sake of easy reference and being able to follow the discussion, if you have feedback, please indicate which rules you're speaking about and try not to blob them all together into one massive wall of text. It will help us and everyone else sift through for commentary on specific rules. You don't need to make a new post for each rule you have thoughts on, but a separate paragraph would be helpful!

Anyway: THE LIST.

The rules we think we should keep:
* 2. Be respectful toward others at all times.
Self-explanatory, though we'd have a lot of moderated posts if we dealt with this one too strictly. We'll need to figure out where to draw the (IC) line - some wiggle-room should be allowed, but serious transgressions should be stomped on.
* 3. Ranting is prohibited.
Same as above.
* 4. Personal attacks are prohibited.
Same as above.
* 5. Trolling is prohibited.
Same as above.
* 6. Racism and discrimination are prohibited.
Same as above.
* 9. Posting of personal information is prohibited.
Self-explanatory. Doxxing is not okay, even IC. We have locator agents for that shit ingame.
* 10. Posting of private CCP communication is prohibited.
Self-explanatory, though the odds of this happening are low. Might be worth discussing when it's permissible to post mails from event actors.
* 11. Discussion of warnings and bans is prohibited.
"... outside of specific designated areas and methods, if we provide them."
* 12. Discussion of forum moderation is prohibited.
"... outside of specific designated areas and methods, if we provide them."
* 13. Spamming is prohibited.
Self-explanatory.
* 17. Redundant and re-posted threads will be locked.
Except with the explicit permission of a member of the moderation team, as it is on Backstage.
* 18. Impersonation of another party is prohibited.
The expectation is that there will likely be zero tolerance for this sort of behavior, and users can expect that characters and/or players trying to impersonate character(s) belonging to other players will have action taken against their account(s).
* 19. New player bashing will not be tolerated.
On an IC forum this is likely to translate as some version of the YDIW rule from Backstage.
* 20. All posts must be related to EVE Online.
Self-explanatory. Couple with 25.
* 21. Posting advertisements is prohibited.
... if it's OOC advertising. Advertise your corp or its services if you want in the appropriate subforums.
* 22. Posting regarding RMT (Real Money Trading) is prohibited.
This will likely be changed to mirror Backstage's current CYA policies about illegal behavior/content.
* 23. Post constructively.
Self-explanatory. We might want to leave a little wiggle-room here though.
* 24. Posting with alternate characters is prohibited in some forum channels.
This rule will probably be rephrased to specify "no astroturfing." It's fine to have multiple characters posting in a thread if they would legitimately be participating in said thread, but astroturfing will be shitcanned.
-"I would frankly enjoy using some of my alternate personas, rather than [redacted], sometimes. Since we can see the backend, unless someone is particularly crafty with hiding their IP, this shouldn't be too much of an issue. Considering we are not the IGS, someone in the community has to go out of their way to do this."
-"I would say that some kind of rule about astroturfing should be in effect. I think people should feel free to use alts, but we want to avoid people using alts to talk to themselves. Can be hard to regulate when people may have characters who would legitimately be participating in the same thread, but I would say if it is done with the intent to astroturf it should be shitcanned."
* 25. Out of character posting on roleplaying channels is prohibited.
Self-explanatory: this is an in-character forum. Out-of-character posting should be done on Backstage when at all possible.
* 26. Re-opening locked topics is prohibited.
Same as 17.
* 27. Off-topic posting is prohibited.
As with EVE-O (in theory), permitted within reason; deliberate attempts at derails or excessive off-topic posting should/will be dealt with.
* 28. Ban evasion is prohibited.
Self-explanatory.
* 30. Posts that distort the forum layout are prohibited.
Self-explanatory.
* 31. Abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers is prohibited.
Probably not necessary to refer to CCP/ISD, but worth rebranding to refer to forum staff and moderation accounts.
* 32. Rumor mongering is prohibited.
Where the line will be needs to be discussed.
-"I think rumors are great, but we would probably have to draw a line somewhere, and somewhere fairly clear. I know there are certain members of the forum for whom rumors are a favorite weapon."
-"We could even have sort of a version of the gossip thread so people can spread rumors about themselves."
-"If we prohibit private conversations being posted, we should prohibit people from spreading rumors that can only be disproven by private conversations."
* 34. Posting of inappopriate content is prohibited.
Self-explanatory. Try to keep it SFW. Moderator discretion here.
* 35. Posting of chat logs outside the Crime & Punishment forum channel is prohibited.
This is done on EVE-O to avoid a lot of drama and "those are faked!" arguments. A valid stance to take in general but there are cases where it could/should be permissible, such as for recording-for-posterity of live events and things like SeyCon. Private conversations and evemails are a no-no. We will need to come up with a clearer definition of what is and what is not acceptable, but the above are a starting example.
-"If we prohibit private conversations being posted, we should prohibit people from spreading rumors that can only be disproven by private conversations."
-"We should honestly keep chat logs out, and leave it on a 'if you want it, please send me a request' basis. It keeps threads neat, and stops people from cherry picking in the thread and possibly derailing."
-"Chat logs of public events are fine, and I think we should probably avoid ones of private conversations."
-"I think we would also want to make clear what is a public event (ex: a conference, a speech, etc) and what is a private event that happens to be in a public channel (ex: overheard conversations in places like bars)."
-"We could keep it loose on rumors and have the same type of rules we have on Backstage for discussing warnings and bans: If you bring it up, it's fair game."
The rules that we think can be discarded:
* 1. You must have an active EVE Online game account to post on our forums.
This can only be enforced if we require it under an API mod (specifically the AccountStatus flag, or whatever it's called). It would prevent some issues, but would not prevent others. Current inclination by the team is to ignore the rule, and just go with a public position of "it's a privilege not a right; we will be keeping an eye on this, so don't abuse it or we'll find a way to disable it."
-"While useful, it would encourage inactive veterans to RP, who otherwise don't want to pay for Chat Client Online."
-"[As] much as I would like to see some of the people who sit on the sidelines yelling banned, I don't think this is either practical or fair."
-"Some people don't have the money, or the time to participate in the game. On the other hand, I would say it's [an issue] we would want to monitor as I would be concerned about certain types of trolling from non-subscribers."
* 7. Discussion of real life religion and politics is prohibited.
Not necessary - implied by the in-character nature of the forum.
* 8. Use of profanity is prohibited.
This rule can go fuck itself in an ironic fashion. More seriously: be reasonable about it. See rules 2-6.
* 14. Pyramid quoting is prohibited.
This is not really a problem on Backstage. It also falls under item 30, so it's a bit redundant.
* 15. Bumping outside the EVE Marketplace and Alliance & Corporation Recruitment channels is prohibited.
If we have specific subforums for this sort of thing, we ought to keep or tweak the rule. As worded, it's not needed. "Be considerate" seems like a reasonable guideline here if necessary.
* 16. Posting about bugs and exploits is prohibited.
Not really necessary - implied by the in-character nature of the forum.
* 33. "Quitting" posts are only permitted on the Out of Pod Experience channel.
Beyond the fact that this refers to a specific subforum we aren't going to have, we also have backstage for OOC posts of this nature.
-"I see nothing wrong with this taking place on the new forums if it's IC."
The rules that could go either way and need more discussion:
* 29. Please use the correct language when posting on the forums.
Not necessary, really.
-"It may be worth suggesting that if you don't post in English the moderation team reserves the right to run it through Google translate and replace it with the results, for better or for worse. Maybe we should add this rule to Backstage even if it isn't used for the IC one."
* 36. Posting of kill reports outside of the Crime & Punishment forum channel is prohibited.
Generally serves to do little but cause drama. Possibly worth including references or details regarding killmails in rules 32 and/or 35.
* PROPOSED: This forum is for capsuleers only.
AKA, "no baseliner alts". Up in the air; the moderation team had no real consensus on the issue, but the "it's a privilege, don't abuse it or we will enact a rule banning it" stance was popular with several of us.
-"I think they should be permitted to begin with and only prohibited if it becomes a problem that can't be sorted by disciplining individual problem users."
-"On baseliner posting, I see the danger, but at the same time I'm not sure I'm behind a 100% ban. Still, if it is popular I'm not too attached either."
-"I don't think that the majority of people use the baseliner characters with ill intent."
-"No baseliner posting, I think. It'll invite too many 'woe be it to you mortals' god-hood posts."
-"The primary problem that I have with both baseliners and inactive mains is you can't shoot them in space. Anyone who can be an asshole with absolute impunity is, to me, a toxic element."
* PROPOSED: IC/OOC divide - players are not their characters, and vice-versa.
-"While this might seem self evident enough it needn't be stated, it is also pretty clear to anyone who spends time RPing that it is often forgotten."
-"As a moderation issue it more likely applies to other people forgetting the difference between a poster and their character."
-"Possible wording: 'Please remember, as an IC forum people will be posting here not as themselves but as their characters. Give other posters the benefit of the doubt that if they aren't being very nice to you IC it might be because their character doesn't like your character - don't just assume that it is because the player doesn't like you. Also feel free to reach out and clear up any possible misunderstandings, rather than jumping to negative conclusions.'"
Have at it.

Morwen Lagann:
Some additional thoughts from me that I didn't just edit into the list directly:

Rule 2-6, 8 (respectfulness, ranting, personal attacks, etc.): This isn't intended to be a hard red line. I would expect us to try to avoid enforcing these rules too strictly, and only take serious action when it was causing a pattern of thread derailment or the like.

Rule 9 (doxxing): It's one thing for people to post their own location, or to post that sort of information (belonging to someone else) with non-hostile intent. This rule should specifically handle doxxing in the traditional sense, though with that said, I don't think that addresses and locations of serious import tend to come up in RP - for someone's actual ingame location, locator agents are always available.

Esna Pitoojee:
There are a few things here I'll address in turn:

Rule 2, 3, 4, 5, 6:
I would prefer that these be left out entirely, and a general rule against being disruptive and/or trollish in general be instituted with the relevant portions of 2-6 listed as things that are likely to be considered 'flash points'. Here's my reasoning: Even if the rules aren't intended to be a 'hard red line', merely having them in place may cause people to tiptoe around them because they aren't exactly sure how and where the line exists with those rules; new people may become confused when they see people apparently ignoring existant rules. Putting them as mere examples under a rule against disruptiveness/trolling moves the focus back to behaviors that we actually want to curtail, while still being informative.

Rule 9, 'doxxing':
This seems questionable and vague to me; does it refer to just telling where a given player is docked at a specific time, where they tend to be active, or where an RP-critical location is? Does it refer to things in space, in text, or both?
- For example - player X puts up some items in space as part of an RP arc they are doing, posts about it on our IC forums. Player Y of opposing faction mentions their location in another post. Did they just commit an offense?
- Player A has a channel for their home/private bar/whatever. Player B has a falling out with player A and posts information regarding the in-universe location of the place represented by the channel. How would this be handled?

Rule 19, 'new player bashing':
While I don't disagree with the rule in concept, I think a line of some kind needs to be worked out for the possibility of a new player posting something which - IC - is quite mockable, without breaking this rule or going OOC. Should their mistake be pointed out in the thread? The post reported and/or a move request be made? The poster quietly PMed and informed of their error?

Rule 32, 'rurmors':
Seems overly sensitive to me unless interpreted in the loosest possible way - the line between rumor and opinion is an exceedingly fuzzy one. E.g., player X posts that player Y supports a faction by doing A, B, C (not verifiable ingame activities). Player Y says "you can't post that, that's a rumor!" Where does the line get crossed without smothering virtually any accusations of any kind?

Rule 35, 'chat logs':
I would personally add the caveat that chat logs may be posted under mutual agreement of all parties involved in them.

Baseliners:
I favor making it a rule only if this develops into an issue.

IC/OOC divide:
I think it merits being up there, even if just as 'ass covering' - so there's something to point to if anyone ever does need to be smacked for breaking this.

Nicoletta Mithra:
I do largely agree with Esna.

More generally, I'd say that the rules should be as few as possible, imho. Having 27 rules or what is confusing, and easily lends itself to metagaming based on those rules. So, I'd propose that the rules get condensed and I think there is a lot of room for that, along the lines Esna proposes for rules 2-6.

Rule 11 is included in rule 12, imho.

Rules 13, 19, 21, 23, 34 can be included in the 2-6 complex.

Rules 17 and 26 are already suggested to fit together. 28 fits here as well, I think.

Rules 20 and 25 are already suggested to be one rule, really. 22 fits here as well, imho.

Morwen Lagann:
Condensing rules: I had figured it was a given that this would happen before any official ruleset was deployed, especially with some of the notes/summaries for individual rules in the list, which is - at least the bolded parts - a verbatim copy of the official EVE forums' ruleset. We don't want 30-40 individual rules either. We do, however, want to start where the apparent core of the issue requiring a new IC forum lies - namely that the rules that are there for EVE-O, do not seem to be enforced consistently or at all when they should be, and that that is contributing to the reasons many people are giving up on the IGS or want an alternative.

The impression we'd gotten from reading the threads here was that if those rules were actually enforced that most of the problems would go away, so we figured it would be simplest to start from the same set of rules and work our way forward from there.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page